Jesus Christ!

[Guiscard]

Doesn't specify, though I guess you could make the argument that at 14 you're considered morally mature, so therefore capable of choosing to marry. I mean if we're honest, post-puberty, it's ok, really. The point is, Mohammad was a sick, anti-semtic, paedophilic f*ck. Jesus was not.

No. The point was that Muhammad was betrothed to a young girl, just as many throughout Europe, the Middle East and China were at the time, and up until this century. It was normal practice, and still is in some places today. The marriage was consummated after puberty (or at least that's what all the Islamic scholars I've discussed the issue with believed). Again, this was common practice throughout the world. Including the Hebrew world in Biblical times. The Bible does not specifically forbid child marriage. Why would it? If The great Kings of Christendom married children. Indeed, your hero Charlemagne married girls at 12 and 13. Jesus did not marry. If he had married it would not have been socially backward, wrong, or even remarkable for him to be betrothed to a child. Although cultural relativism is usually a bit of a naiive explanation, in this case it really is everything.

[Napoleon Ier]

Doesn't specify, though I guess you could make the argument that at 14 you're considered morally mature, so therefore capable of choosing to marry. I mean if we're honest, post-puberty, it's ok, really. The point is, Mohammad was a sick, anti-semtic, paedophilic f*ck. Jesus was not.

No. The point was that Muhammad was betrothed to a young girl, just as many throughout Europe, the Middle East and China were at the time, and up until this century. It was normal practice, and still is in some places today. The marriage was consummated after puberty (or at least that's what all the Islamic scholars I've discussed the issue with believed). Again, this was common practice throughout the world. Including the Hebrew world in Biblical times. The Bible does not specifically forbid child marriage. Why would it? If The great Kings of Christendom married children. Indeed, your hero Charlemagne married girls at 12 and 13. Jesus did not marry. If he had married it would not have been socially backward, wrong, or even remarkable for him to be betrothed to a child. Although cultural relativism is usually a bit of a naiive explanation, in this case it really is everything.

No. The point was that Muhammad was betrothed to a young girl aged 6, and he consumated the marriage when she was 9 years old. That's plastered all over the Hadith.

Narrated Aysha:
...the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years..." (Sahih Al-Bukhari)

No? Still not shocked?

Enjoy this little verse from the Qu'uran:


"And if you are in doubt as to the prescribed period for such of your women as have despaired of monthly courses, then know that the prescribed period for them is three months, and also for such as do not have their monthly courses yet. " Sourat 65:4


Now look me in the eye and tell me that Mohammad wasn't a sick, twisted and repulsive man.

[Napoleon Ier]

I'll ask you this question: is your belief in Islam's innocent nature falsifiable?

Still waiting on this one, Jizz-tard.

[Guiscard]

I'll ask you this question: is your belief in Islam's innocent nature falsifiable?

Still waiting on this one, Jizz-tard.

I don't believe Islam is 'innocent'. I just seek to explain issues in a number of ways, including looking at factors other than religious doctrine.

[Guiscard]

Doesn't specify, though I guess you could make the argument that at 14 you're considered morally mature, so therefore capable of choosing to marry. I mean if we're honest, post-puberty, it's ok, really. The point is, Mohammad was a sick, anti-semtic, paedophilic f*ck. Jesus was not.

No. The point was that Muhammad was betrothed to a young girl, just as many throughout Europe, the Middle East and China were at the time, and up until this century. It was normal practice, and still is in some places today. The marriage was consummated after puberty (or at least that's what all the Islamic scholars I've discussed the issue with believed). Again, this was common practice throughout the world. Including the Hebrew world in Biblical times. The Bible does not specifically forbid child marriage. Why would it? If The great Kings of Christendom married children. Indeed, your hero Charlemagne married girls at 12 and 13. Jesus did not marry. If he had married it would not have been socially backward, wrong, or even remarkable for him to be betrothed to a child. Although cultural relativism is usually a bit of a naiive explanation, in this case it really is everything.

Now look me in the eye and tell me that Mohammad wasn't a sick, twisted and repulsive man.

How about you deal with the points I made rather than repeating midless vindictive rubbish based only on modern ideas of right and wrong not present at the time of either the time of the Koran nor, indeed, the Bible.

[Napoleon Ier]

Really? You don't judge religions by virtue of what their respective dogmas and doctrines are? So what are your miracle factors you put into the equation?

[Napoleon Ier]

Doesn't specify, though I guess you could make the argument that at 14 you're considered morally mature, so therefore capable of choosing to marry. I mean if we're honest, post-puberty, it's ok, really. The point is, Mohammad was a sick, anti-semtic, paedophilic f*ck. Jesus was not.

No. The point was that Muhammad was betrothed to a young girl, just as many throughout Europe, the Middle East and China were at the time, and up until this century. It was normal practice, and still is in some places today. The marriage was consummated after puberty (or at least that's what all the Islamic scholars I've discussed the issue with believed). Again, this was common practice throughout the world. Including the Hebrew world in Biblical times. The Bible does not specifically forbid child marriage. Why would it? If The great Kings of Christendom married children. Indeed, your hero Charlemagne married girls at 12 and 13. Jesus did not marry. If he had married it would not have been socially backward, wrong, or even remarkable for him to be betrothed to a child. Although cultural relativism is usually a bit of a naiive explanation, in this case it really is everything.

Now look me in the eye and tell me that Mohammad wasn't a sick, twisted and repulsive man.

How about you deal with the points I made rather than repeating midless vindictive rubbish based only on modern ideas of right and wrong not present at the time of either the time of the Koran nor, indeed, the Bible.

Oh but I have dealt with them, Jizzy. You see the Hadiths (you do know, O Historian, what the Hadiths are, don't you?) repeatedly attest to the fact that Mohammad had sexual intercourse with Aisha when she was 9, having been betrothed to her when she was 6. Furthermore, the Qu'uran states that you can consummate a marriage before the girl has had a menstrual cycle. That's your precious religion of peace, love and tolerance for you.

[Guiscard]

Doesn't specify, though I guess you could make the argument that at 14 you're considered morally mature, so therefore capable of choosing to marry. I mean if we're honest, post-puberty, it's ok, really. The point is, Mohammad was a sick, anti-semtic, paedophilic f*ck. Jesus was not.

No. The point was that Muhammad was betrothed to a young girl, just as many throughout Europe, the Middle East and China were at the time, and up until this century. It was normal practice, and still is in some places today. The marriage was consummated after puberty (or at least that's what all the Islamic scholars I've discussed the issue with believed). Again, this was common practice throughout the world. Including the Hebrew world in Biblical times. The Bible does not specifically forbid child marriage. Why would it? If The great Kings of Christendom married children. Indeed, your hero Charlemagne married girls at 12 and 13. Jesus did not marry. If he had married it would not have been socially backward, wrong, or even remarkable for him to be betrothed to a child. Although cultural relativism is usually a bit of a naiive explanation, in this case it really is everything.

Now look me in the eye and tell me that Mohammad wasn't a sick, twisted and repulsive man.

How about you deal with the points I made rather than repeating mindless vindictive rubbish based only on modern ideas of right and wrong not present at the time of either the time of the Koran nor, indeed, the Bible.

Oh but I have dealt with them, Jizzy. You see the Hadiths (you do know, O Historian, what the Hadiths are, don't you?) repeatedly attest to the fact that Mohammad had sexual intercourse with Aisha when she was 9, having been betrothed to her when she was 6. Furthermore, the Qu'uran states that you can consummate a marriage before the girl has had a menstrual cycle. That's your precious religion of peace, love and tolerance for you.

Do you want to deal with the points I made, Yappy?

[Napoleon Ier]

I just dealt with your supposed "points", which turned out to be unsubstantiated bullshit.

[Guiscard]

I just dealt with your supposed "points", which turned out to be unsubstantiated bullshit.

No you didn't. You repeated your original statement. I'd invite you to reply to my argument, however...

[Napoleon Ier]

I just dealt with your supposed "points", which turned out to be unsubstantiated bullshit.

No you didn't. You repeated your original statement. I'd invite you to reply to my argument, however...

Your argument was that Mohammad only consumated the marriage later. I then quoted the Hadith and Qu'uran to rebutt that. So feel free to concede victory to me and my awesome Islamic knowledge.

[Guiscard]

I just dealt with your supposed "points", which turned out to be unsubstantiated bullshit.

No you didn't. You repeated your original statement. I'd invite you to reply to my argument, however...

Your argument was that Mohammad only consumated the marriage later. I then quoted the Hadith and Qu'uran to rebutt that. So feel free to concede victory to me and my awesome Islamic knowledge.

Would you care to go back and re-read my post, and then respond to the arguments within?

[Guiscard]

I just dealt with your supposed "points", which turned out to be unsubstantiated bullshit.

No you didn't. You repeated your original statement. I'd invite you to reply to my argument, however...

Your argument was that Mohammad only consumated the marriage later. I then quoted the Hadith and Qu'uran to rebutt that. So feel free to concede victory to me and my awesome Islamic knowledge.

Would you care to go back and re-read my post, and then respond to the arguments within?

[Napoleon Ier]

I just fucking did! Mohammad consummated the marriage when she was 9. Charlemgane did his wife when she was 13, ok, a little young, but technically not pedophilic. And he wasn't 50 something when he did either.

[Guiscard]

I just fucking did! Mohammad consummated the marriage when she was 9. Charlemgane did his wife when she was 13, ok, a little young, but technically not pedophilic. And he wasn't 50 something when he did either.

If you'd care to go back and deal with my actual argument, I'd be much obliged.

[Guiscard]

And no, he was in his mid 40s.

[Napoleon Ier]

I just fucking did! Mohammad consummated the marriage when she was 9. Charlemgane did his wife when she was 13, ok, a little young, but technically not pedophilic. And he wasn't 50 something when he did either.

If you'd care to go back and deal with my actual argument, I'd be much obliged.

If you'd care to go back and formulate an actual argument, I'd be much obliged.

[Napoleon Ier]

Users browsing this forum: Napoleon Ier, Snorri1234

What's this though? Is snorrarse back from the bar? Perhaps he can tell us exactly what it is his belief about Islam is and whether it is falsifiable.

[Guiscard]

The point was that Muhammad was betrothed to a young girl, just as many throughout Europe, the Middle East and China were at the time, and up until this century. It was normal practice, and still is in some places today. The marriage was consummated after puberty (or at least that's what all the Islamic scholars I've discussed the issue with believed). Again, this was common practice throughout the world. Including the Hebrew world in Biblical times. The Bible does not specifically forbid child marriage. Why would it? The great Kings of Christendom married children. Indeed, your hero Charlemagne married girls at 12 and 13 [when he was in his mid 40s]. Jesus did not marry. If he had married it would not have been socially backward, wrong, or even remarkable for him to be betrothed to a child. Although cultural relativism is usually a bit of a naive explanation, in this case it really is everything.

[Snorri1234]

Users browsing this forum: Napoleon Ier, Snorri1234

What's this though? Is snorrarse back from the bar? Perhaps he can tell us exactly what it is his belief about Islam is and whether it is falsifiable.

Yes I am back.

[Napoleon Ier]

The point was that Muhammad was betrothed to a young girl, just as many throughout Europe, the Middle East and China were at the time, and up until this century.

Yes, but he consummated the marriage when she was 9.That is, pre-puberty.

It was normal practice, and still is in some places today. The marriage was consummated after puberty (or at least that's what all the Islamic scholars I've discussed the issue with believed).

Having sex with 9 year olds was not. I don't know which muslim scholars you've been talking to, but the Hadith make it patently obvious he screwed a 9 year old kid. Which makes him a pedophile.

Aysha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

(Sahih Muslim)

Again, this was common practice throughout the world. Including the Hebrew world in Biblical times. The Bible does not specifically forbid child marriage. Why would it?

No, it doesn't, but unlike the Qu'uran it doesn't condone it. I think you'll find that all Church fathers and all sound doctors of the Church would unequivocally condemn such practice. Christian doctrine on sex is clear: man and a woman. Not a 9 year old girl.

The great Kings of Christendom married children. Indeed, your hero Charlemagne married girls at 12 and 13 [when he was in his mid 40s].

He married a 13 year old, of child bearing age (she had her first child, Charles, with him when she was 13).

Jesus did not marry. If he had married it would not have been socially backward, wrong, or even remarkable for him to be betrothed to a child.

It would hae been backward, wrong and remarkable had he had sex with a 9 year old.

[Snorri1234]

You're deeply confused. I have never claimed that we can use the praxis of Islam against it, I have purely used it's ideological basis and the actions of Mohammad (which count as an ideological base, as the actions of our Lord do, perhaps this is why you didn't understand?).

The problem however is that you have repeatedly used examples as a justification. Like that girl who got stoned for getting raped? You act like you only base your ideas on the ideological basis, but it's pretty clear you actually don't.
In fact, it would be impossible to do that. I mean, you wouldn't be saying all this shit if the islamic community didn't do any of the things you keep on ranting about.

However, your contention seems t be that Islam is violent, but that Christianity is more violent

Not at all.

because Christians have been (according to your warped world view) more violent in past. By virtue of which standard, I argue atheism is a violent, syncretic juxtaposition of neo-Nazism and Communism, because Stalin and Hitler were atheist.

NO YOU DIPSHIT! It's not my warped world view, it's the fucking truth. Are you saying that christians haven't been unbelievably violent in the past? Or were they not true christians? (Despite using scripture to justify their actions?)

Also, Hitler wasn't an atheist. I think you need to read moar books.

So I ask again: if we rule out the actions of aheists, muslims and Christians as basis for judging their respective religions/ideologies, and we use purely the content of the latter, Islam is a crude proto-fascist political system, at best.

The simple fact of the matter is that you can justify anything using scripture. It's why many christians support the death penalty and don't seem to believe in charity.

I mean, both the catholics and islam have a bunch of leaders who interpret the holy book for you. They claim with straight faces that "what Jesus meant to say was..." and expect their followers to just lap it up, which they fucking do! It was recently decided by a bunch of leaders of the islam (guys with beards and serious faces who are trying to fight a lost war) that Uggs, a type of footwear that is just fucking ugly but whatever, we're un-islamic. They appereantly read in the Quran that women can't wear them.

Honestly, you can justify the weirdest shit, you don't need the ideological basis for it.

[joecoolfrog]

I think an interesting point was made earlier that most people are rather more concerned about Catholic priests buggering boys in the very recent past.

[Snorri1234]

No, it doesn't, but unlike the Qu'uran it doesn't condone it. I think you'll find that all Church fathers and all sound doctors of the Church would unequivocally condemn such practice. Christian doctrine on sex is clear: man and a woman. Not a 9 year old girl.

Well ofcourse they condemn it now. That's the whole point.

[Napoleon Ier]

I think an interesting point was made earlier that most people are rather more concerned about Catholic priests buggering boys in the very recent past.

1/Find me a single study suggesting that Cathlolic clergymen are any more likely to be involved in sexual abuse than any other cross-section of society.
2/Find me a single case in which they attempted to justify their actions using Catholic doctrine.